RFK Jr. Blowing the Whistle on Diebold

From In These Times.

On July 13, the Pensacola, Fla.-based law firm of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. filed a "qui tam" lawsuit in U.S. District Court, alleging that Diebold and other electronic voting machine (EVM) companies fraudulently represented to state election boards and the federal government that their products were "unhackable."

Kennedy claims to have witnesses "centrally located, deep within the corporations," who will confirm that company officials withheld their knowledge of problems with accuracy, reliability and security of EVMs in order to procure government contracts. Since going into service, many of these machines have been linked to allegations of election fraud.

This suit follows the actions of several others, as well as Kennedy's own research into Voter Fraud -- but will it make a significant difference in this Novembers Elections?

In the past few years Diebold has been kicked out of Maryland.

Voter Action.org has filed suit against Diebold in which the organization claimed (as reported by Bradblog):

"Diebold's TSx touch screen voting system is a severe security risk, and does not accommodate all disabled voters as required by law."
They also add that that "The Diebold system is difficult if not impossible to audit or recount, and has been proven vulnerable to malicious tampering in tests and studies. Diebold technology contains 'interpreted' code, which is easily hacked, and illegal for voting systems in the State of California."

The same group recently carried out a similar action in the state of New Mexico, in regard to the use of Sequoia Touch-Screen voting machines there. That suit ultimately led to the ban of use of such machines, and a bill which was recently signed by Gov. Bill Richardson requiring a paper ballot with every vote cast in the state.

Diebold and other EVM's security problems have been well documented.

In 2004 Diebold was de-certified in California by then Secretary of State Kevin Shelley (D) after revelations found in documents provided by Stephen Heller that Diebold was in violation of California State election law and that they fully intended to remain so. That conditionally re-certification was subsequently reversed by Shelley's Republican replacement, a move which has led to the Bilbray/Busby election controversy and recount efforts.

The breaches in security for the exceedingly hackable Diebold voting machines and the subsequent decertified use of such systems in the important "bellwether" election have prompted a number of Election Integrity organizations to declare "No Confidence" in the results of the election as reported by Registrar Haas. Haas himself has even admitted that storage of such machines in poll workers' cars cannot be considered secure as required by state and federal law.

Last December Diebold admitted that they were still had the interpreted code problem discovered by Ion Sancho in Leon Country Florida.

Meanwhile, another Whistle-blower, William Singer, came forward in March alleging that EVMs company Hart Intervic had witnessed "fraudulent activities, buggy software and hardware, dysfunctional testing and development procedures, unsecured working environments and possible criminal behavior" in relation to the Texas and Ohio elections in 2004.

Kennedy's own case alleges widespread fraud in the 2004 election:

According to the Election Assistance Commission, more than 61 percent of votes in the 2004 presidential election were cast and/or tallied by EVMs. Election Data Services, a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm, estimates that the figure will jump to 80 percent by November, which will see elections for all 435 seats in the House of Representatives.

Matt Schultz, an attorney with Kennedy's law firm, Levin Papantonio, describes the process of competition for HAVA's $300 million of contractor funds as "a race to the bottom." "There is no question in my mind that these companies sacrificed security and accuracy, mass-producing a cheap product to cash in on tons of federal money," Schultz says. "It's an industry-wide problem."

However, the likely hood that this suit will significantly affect the elections this November are slim as it's quite likely that a 60-day delay may make this suit a moot point until September.

The contents of the suit could be under judicial seal for at least 60 days while the U.S. Department of Justice considers whether or not to join the suit. If U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales decides not to join the suit, Levin Papantonio may approach individual state attorneys general. If no one joins, the firm is free to, as Papantonio puts it, "stand in the shoes of the Attorney General and fight on behalf of the taxpayers and the nation."

Vyan